Marcin Bogdan: Hulai soul

Who are the judges, called contemptible neo-judges? Well, according to coalition politicians, on 13 December these are judges appointed by the National Judicial Council after 2017, that is, from the minute erstwhile 15 judges-members of the Council began to appoint the Sejm. It is essential to mention to legal regulations and in peculiar to the Constitution of the Republic, which in Article 187 defines the composition and mode of election of the National Judicial Council, namely:

1. The National Judicial Council consists of:

1) the First president of the ultimate Court, the Minister of Justice, the president of the ultimate Administrative Court and the individual appointed by the president of the Republic,

2. 15 members elected from among the judges ultimate Court, Universal Courts, Administrative and Military Courts,

3) 4 members elected by the Sejm from among Members and 2 members elected by the legislature from among Senators.

2. The National Judicial Council shall elect its president and 2 Vice-Presidents from among its members.

3. The word of office of elected members of the National Judicial Council shall be 4 years.

4. System, scope and mode of operation of the National Judicial Council, and The choice of its members shall be governed by the Act.

The evidence in the Constitution is unambiguous. The 15th members of the National Court registry must be judges, but their choice is not decided by the Constitution but by the Act. In 2017, the democratically elected Sejm passed the Act, which states that these 15th members of the KRS elect among the judges of the Sejm. The bill was signed by the democratically elected president and is the only law in force and irrefutable. By a law established by the will of Sovereign, who chose specified a Sejm and specified a President, giving them a mandate to pass specified a law. However, coalition politicians on 13 December challenge the legality of this Act, claiming that due to the apolitical nature of the courts, judges can only choose judges, which is allegedly besides due to EU law. And since judges have not been elected to the National Court registry only by Members, in accordance with the rule of passivity, the National Court Register, whose members are these judges, has no right to appoint judges. In conclusion, so elected judges are neo-judges, meaning they are not judges at all.

Since the ban on politicians to elect judges is to be derived from EU law, the applicable government in force in Germany, for example, should be cited here. In Germany, judges are elected by the Committee on the Election of Judges (Richterwahlausschuss), which is equivalent to the Polish National Judiciary Council. The German Commission consists of 32 members, namely:

• of the 16 national Justice Ministers (Länder)

• of 16 members of the Bundestag (German parliament), elected in proportion to the party's strength

As you can see, the members of the German KRS are not just politicians. In summary:

- in Germany: Judges appoint KWS consisting of politicians selected au politicians

- in Poland: Judges appoint KRS composed of judges selected au politicians

According to the German legislature, the German legal model described above is intended to service depoliticalCourts. According to the politicians of the coalition, on 13 December Polish regulations service politicisation of courts. Where's the logic? The European Court of Human Rights has made this clear, stating that "In any older democracies, there are systems in which executive power has a strong influence on the appointment of judges. specified systems can function well in practice and let independent justice, as executive power limits the legal culture and traditions that have developed for a long time." All is clear, Germany has a higher legal culture than Poland. Deutschland über Alles. How do we know that?

Some readers may know that I have a polytechnic education, and I'm close to science. proceeding from coalition politicians on 13 December that judges can only be chosen by judges, I gotta ask: and who chose the first justice in the past of the Polish judiciary? If it was not a judge, following the reasoning of the politicians of the tusk coalition, all judges, starting with the former, are contaminated by this "legal defect" and are neo-judges. So they are not judges, and so the judiciary in Poland does not exist. However, if the first justice had chosen the judge, the first justice would not be the first, and we return to the question: who elected the first justice in the past of the Polish judiciary. How do we resolve this dilemma to make the coalition politicians' reasoning on December 13 logical? It can be assumed that the first justice was appointed by the Lord God. The Lord God is the Judge, and the Righteous. But the coalition politicians had the privilege of treating Catholics, so it would be hard for them to admit that God had the privilege of calling the first judge. In addition, if God calls someone, it's that world. How, then, could a justice appointed to that planet appoint more judges in this world, here on earth?

Perhaps the only way for the Polish judiciary will be for Tusk to issue a decree that judges in Poland can be, now and in the future, only judges appointed by Żurek. After all, Żurek in 1 of his interviews told himself that he was a god. He's a god and a judge. The perfect solution, but... it was ruined. After all, Żurek had to relinquish his position as a justice erstwhile he was serving as minister. It was so close to solving the problem, it was adequate not to call Żurek as a minister. But the milk spilled. Now what?

Now the soul of hell is gone. You can steal, rape and murder. Hulaj soul of hell is gone, no courts, no Poland. Poland is no longer there. They destroyed the law, destroyed the state. Barbarians.

Mr Bogdan